Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900F outperforms the cheaper Core i5-6600K on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i5-6600K is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-10900F is 1764 days newer than the cheaper Core i5-6600K.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-6600K
- Up to 35% cheaper than Core i9-10900F - €188.88 vs €288.88
- Up to 34% better value when playing Dead Space than Core i9-10900F - €1.25 vs €1.88 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900F
- Performs up to 2% better in Dead Space than Core i5-6600K - 154 vs 151 FPS
- Consumes up to 29% less energy than Intel Core i5-6600K - 65 vs 91 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i5-6600K - 20 vs 4 threads
Dead Space
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jul 2nd, 2015
FPS
151
98%
Value, €/FPS
€1.25/FPS
100%
Price, €
€188.88
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €188.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 367 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
154
100%
Value, €/FPS
€1.88/FPS
66%
Price, €
€288.88
65%
FPS Winner
Buy for €288.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 367 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jul 2nd, 2015
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-6600K | vs | Intel Core i9-10900F |
---|---|---|
Jul 2nd, 2015 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
Core i5 | Collection | Core i9 |
Skylake | Codename | Comet Lake |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 10 |
4 | Threads | 20 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
3.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.2 GHz |
91 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |